What is the translator's obligation?

The New York Times published a review of a French novel, And Their Children After Them, the novel I just reviewed. In it the Times reviewer complains, "But it is a flawed artwork all the same — a somewhat ineptly translated narrative (“you guys give me a pain,” one native-born character declares) . . . Its descriptive language can be comically bad, with phrases any creative writing instructor would banish from her class: A heart is “as heavy as an anvil”; the day is “as hot as a frying pan”; expressions flit across faces “like clouds”; a mixed-race girl is “a knockout”; a MAC 50 pistol is “super beautiful.”

Without defending (or attacking) this reviewer, it this raises a question: What is the translator's obligation here? To reflect the author's work as written or to improve it? To use the author's images and metaphors or invent her own?

It provoked a number of responses from the Literary Translation Facebook group, which I have edited and copied below:

SP: I'd say the translator should reflect the author's work as is. It's more complicated when it comes to idioms and metaphor or similes, though. In Catalan, we say 'anar amb peus de plom' (walk with feet of lead) whereas in English, we 'walk/tread on eggshells'. The Catalan is nice and paints a good picture, but -- unless my aim were to maintain a strongly Catalan flavour -- I'd go for eggshells rather than leaden feet in a translation. Also, some metaphors and similes can be fresh and original in one language, but hackneyed and clichéd in another. It's all a question of balance and the effect, firstly, that the author was creating, and secondly, that the translator wants to create or reproduce.

BH: But walking on eggshells is the opposite of walking with feet of lead.

SP:Not really. In either case you have to tread very very gently so as not to break what's underfoot.

LL: Hm, I understand walking with feet of lead to mean (metaphorically) clomping about clumsily, while walking on eggshells implies an effort to tread very delicately and not break them?

SP: Not in Catalan.This is, of course, another reason why it's important to translate the intention of the author and not, when it comes to idiomatic use, go for a more literal approach.

GT: I think your example of peus de plom demonstrates very well why it is usually better to use an equivalent idiom in English rather than sticking to the original image - at least when the original image gives a very different impression. If the author didn't mean something to sound different or awkward, then it is not really a good idea to come up with a translation that is. Of course, sometimes authors deliberately play with language to give weird images or ways of expressing themselves (one of my authors does this), in which case you have to come up with something that reflects that intent and has a similar effect in English, but otherwise I think you are doing the original text/author a disservice.

EB: “Ineptly translated” seems like inflammatory language rather than from a place of knowledge or authority. Unless the reviewer was remotely as qualified as the translator themself, I wouldn’t give this much attention.

NL: He lives in Paris and is married to a Frenchwoman, so I think it's pretty likely he's come across it in French.

JK: Some translations are inept. If the reviewer can make the case with the original text, s/he should. But general accusations don't help.

CH: Translators shouldn't be editors - so even though I agree with the reviewer that "hot as a frying pan" is a dull turn of phrase (in English just as in French), that's the fault of the writer, not the translator. (I'm not sure if the reviewer was implying otherwise; it doesn't sound like it.) What does sound like a translation flaw is the "you guys give me a pain" line - if it wasn't intended to be grammatically incorrect, then yes, this was a bit of a cock-up on the translator's part.

AH: It all depends on the original work. A cliché for a cliché. As the poet J. H. Prynne says, 'don't solve the problem - translate it!'

AG: Japanese as a language has a high tolerance for mixed metaphors. I think this is because character combinations create independent visual worlds that can sit comfortably next to each other without much commingling. A straight translation of such a sentence into English can be risible gibberish.

RS: Well said. The challenge of striking a balance between explaining and exposing to another language.

MM: I wonder of any of these are attempts to render youth speak or non native speakers of French? Just a thought. FWIW, I like a heart as heavy as an anvil. And give me a pain isn't impossible in BE.

CC: I have German friends with excellent English who choose to say “he’s falling on my nerves” because they find it expresses what they want to say better than “getting”. I wouldn’t put it in a translation, though. Ditto my Israeli friend’s preferred “It does me nothing” - though I do use it with her.

LL: From the examples given, I wondered if it was intended to suggest a young person's speech (not sure how authentic the result is tbh)? It sounds as if the review transfers blame for aspects of the original book and its writing, to the translation. Makes no effort to see if the frying pan and anvil similes are there in the FR, for eg. (and if the reviewer did check, and they are, doesn't want to blame the author?) Sloppy.

SP: How do you know they didn’t check the original French?

DC: Isn't the problem in the example the whole construction ("you guys give me a pain")? (Rather than "you guys are a pain [in the neck]")

DD: I just read the entire review and wondered myself what is the original French for "you guys give me a pain"? This was the reviewer's only example of "somewhat inept" translation and I wish he'd expanded on why. I think either "give me" or "are a" pain is standard American conversational usage (at least for my generation). As to where the pain's located, it can be idiomatically either "in the ass" or "the neck". But "neck" feels definitely more dated and leaving out "the ass" softens the complaint. A diplomatic omission when, say, expressing the complaint to one's partner? Similarly isn't "give me" a little milder that "are"?

JZ: That's a calque of the French phrase "vous me faites de la peine." It's often translated as "you're hurting my feelings." NOT "you're a pain in the neck."

DD: So what's going on in the passage is "hurt", not "annoyance"? But would the character say "you guys are hurtful" to his buddies? Or would something closer to "you're killing me" or "breaking my..." be more in character. I haven't read the book, just saying the rendering may be not all that simple and the foreignization of dialogue here maybe not all that awful an alternative.

VJ: It's a question for everyone, really. Where does your loyalty lie? Your publisher, your wallet, your target language, your author? From readers' perspective, it's quite clear: they don't know about our deadlines. They just want the text in the best shape possible.

DM: I'm no judge of English prose, but "phrases any creative writing instructor would banish from her class" gives me a pause. That should not be a criterion outside a creative writing class. A lot of great literature in any language would be banned wholesale by a run-of-the-mill creative writing instructor.

MS: The reviewer's overall impression was that the text used clichéd language, but also clichéd narratives and structures. These things seem, to the reviewer, to be connected and I would generally agree. The writer who says that an expression flitted across someone's face like a passing cloud is putting you on notice that he (in this case) is not taking every precaution to avoid mental ruts. And that's a serious criticism, not just in a writing class. The book is trying to depict a world that is often overlooked, or whose complexities are flattened. If he does the same thing, it should be noted.

LC: I'm working on an MFA in Literary Translation and this is a question we grapple with a lot. Translating is certainly a delicate balancing act and there might be times when the translator improves the text's clarity but if the text has a unique tone, that needs to be preserved in the translation. Without reading the full article I don't want to judge this reviewer but I do wonder what he/she considers the role of the translator to be.

CC: As others have pointed out: an editor was also involved in this process, and should definitely have pounced on some of the examples given.

My opinion: I believe the translator's obligation is to the reader. The first challenge is to convey the author's meaning even if, as sometimes happens in Japanese, the meaning is between the lines, not in the text. The second challenge I believe is to preserve as much as possible the author's tone, style, cast of mind. If  it comes down to a question of clarity versus style, however, I would in most cases go for clarity.